Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
156 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Extending Network Calculus To Deal With Partially Negative And Decreasing Service Curves (2403.18042v1)

Published 26 Mar 2024 in cs.NI

Abstract: Network Calculus (NC) is a versatile analytical methodology to efficiently compute performance bounds in networked systems. The arrival and service curve abstractions allow to model diverse and heterogeneous distributed systems. The operations to compute residual service curves and to concatenate sequences of systems enable an efficient and accurate calculation of per-flow timing guarantees. Yet, in some scenarios involving multiple concurrent flows at a system, the central notion of so-called min-plus service curves is too weak to still be able to compute a meaningful residual service curve. In these cases, one usually resorts to so-called strict service curves that enable the computation of per-flow bounds. However, strict service curves are restrictive: (1) there are service elements for which only min-plus service curves can be provided but not strict ones and (2) strict service curves generally have no concatenation property, i.e., a sequence of two strict systems does not yield a strict service curve. In this report, we extend NC to deal with systems only offering aggregate min-plus service curves to multiple flows. The key to this extension is the exploitation of minimal arrival curves, i.e., lower bounds on the arrival process. Technically speaking, we provide basic performance bounds (backlog and delay) for the case of negative service curves. We also discuss their accuracy and show them to be tight. In order to illustrate their usefulness we also present patterns of application of these new results for: (1) heterogeneous systems involving computation and communication resources and (2) finite buffers that are shared between multiple flows.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (17)
  1. L. Maile, K.-S. Hielscher, and R. German, “Network calculus results for TSN: An introduction,” in 2020 Information Communication Technologies Conference (ICTC).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 131–140.
  2. J. A. R. De Azua and M. Boyer, “Complete modelling of AVB in network calculus framework,” in Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Real-Time Networks and Systems, 2014, pp. 55–64.
  3. L. Zhao, P. Pop, and S. S. Craciunas, “Worst-case latency analysis for IEEE 802.1 Qbv time sensitive networks using network calculus,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 41 803–41 815, 2018.
  4. H. Charara, J.-L. Scharbarg, J. Ermont, and C. Fraboul, “Methods for bounding end-to-end delays on an AFDX network,” in 18th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS’06).   IEEE, 2006, pp. 10–19.
  5. F. Frances, C. Fraboul, and J. Grieu, “Using network calculus to optimize the AFDX network,” in Conference ERTS’06, 2006.
  6. M. Boyer and C. Fraboul, “Tightening end to end delay upper bound for AFDX network calculus with rate latency FIFO servers using network calculus,” in 2008 IEEE International Workshop on Factory Communication Systems.   IEEE, 2008, pp. 11–20.
  7. M. Bakhouya, S. Suboh, J. Gaber, and T. El-Ghazawi, “Analytical modeling and evaluation of on-chip interconnects using network calculus,” in 2009 3rd ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Networks-on-Chip.   IEEE, 2009, pp. 74–79.
  8. M. Boyer, A. Graillat, B. D. De Dinechin, and J. Migge, “Bounding the delays of the MPPA network-on-chip with network calculus: Models and benchmarks,” Performance Evaluation, vol. 143, pp. 102–124, 2020.
  9. R. L. Cruz, “A calculus for network delay. I. Network elements in isolation,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 114–131, 1991.
  10. ——, “A calculus for network delay. II. Network analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 132–141, 1991.
  11. J. B. Schmitt, F. A. Zdarsky, and I. Martinovic, “Improving performance bounds in feed-forward networks by paying multiplexing only once,” in 14th GI/ITG Conference-Measurement, Modelling and Evalutation of Computer and Communication Systems.   VDE, 2008, pp. 1–15.
  12. J. B. Schmitt, F. A. Zdarsky, and M. Fidler, “Delay bounds under arbitrary multiplexing: When network calculus leaves you in the lurch…” in IEEE INFOCOM 2008-The 27th Conference on Computer Communications.   IEEE, 2008, pp. 1669–1677.
  13. F. Geyer and S. Bondorf, “DeepTMA: Predicting effective contention models for network calculus using graph neural networks,” in IEEE INFOCOM 2019-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications.   IEEE, 2019, pp. 1009–1017.
  14. S. Bondorf, P. Nikolaus, and J. B. Schmitt, “Quality and cost of deterministic network calculus: Design and evaluation of an accurate and fast analysis,” Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–34, 2017.
  15. M. Moy and K. Altisen, “Arrival curves for real-time calculus: the causality problem and its solutions,” in International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems.   Springer, 2010, pp. 358–372.
  16. D. Guidolin-Pina and M. Boyer, “Looking for equivalences of the services between left and right continuity in the Network Calculus theory,” Sep. 2022, working paper or preprint. [Online]. Available: https://hal.science/hal-03772867
  17. R. Agrawal, R. L. Cruz, C. Okino, and R. Rajan, “Performance bounds for flow control protocols,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 310–323, 1999.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.